Hindu's to Christians in India: "convert or die"

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Thor

So we are thinking its nothing to do with religion, its politics.

It's economics. On a personal scale.

If you're doing All Right Jack, and everyone else is, you're not going to bother going around killing people different than you. If you've got nothing left to lose, then you're receptive to any nutbar hook. Have enough folks of your particular demographic in similar straights banding together and you've got a revolution. If you're a "Have" and the "Have-Nots" start getting uppity, you've got persecution.

It's naturally expedient to exploit differences in either scenario.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Thor

So we are thinking its nothing to do with religion, its politics.

Last time I checked people didn't go to such extremes for a political ideology, but a religious ideology they definitely do.

Like Israel is a political problem, northern Ireland, the separation of India into Pakistan, etc..

Its all politics, nothing to do with religious beliefs. Even though those beliefs are absolutist, and are not forgiving of those who don't agree.

Coincidence.

The Soviet Union, China, Cambodia all killed millions in the name of politics. They all subscribed to atheistic faith.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

The Soviet Union, China, Cambodia all killed millions in the name of politics. They all subscribed to atheistic faith.

What's the list of religious wars like?

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Thor

So we are thinking its nothing to do with religion, its politics.

Last time I checked people didn't go to such extremes for a political ideology, but a religious ideology they definitely do.

Like Israel is a political problem, northern Ireland, the separation of India into Pakistan, etc..

Its all politics, nothing to do with religious beliefs. Even though those beliefs are absolutist, and are not forgiving of those who don't agree.

Coincidence.

Well I mean that those in control of the movements or actions are doing it for political purposes, while those being led are being led because of their religious beliefs.

Like what is going on with Islam in many parts of the world right now. Or heck, even the conservative Christian right in the US. The leaders at the top USE religious belief to further their political and power/monetary agendas. The people at the top, with the most information and power, use religion as a tool to lead others into helping them achieve their aims.

It's been argued, especially in the case of Iran, that a lot of the things the leaders say, they don't truly believe, they are just playing to their base and getting them to help their cause. Kinda like the homosexual republican leaders who pretend to be against the gay movement in the US.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

The Soviet Union, China, Cambodia all killed millions in the name of politics. They all subscribed to atheistic faith.

You forgot Hitler. And Darwin's deathbed conversion.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

What's the list of religious wars like?

You mean in the 20th century? They don't even compare. The atheists were by far the bloodiest religious camp. I don't think you can measure any other century because atheism had no large following or political power until communism. Apparently it takes repressive laws, abolishment of civil liberties, and much bloodshed to convince a majority to embrace atheism.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

You mean in the 20th century? They don't even compare. The atheists were by far the bloodiest religious camp. I don't think you can measure any other century because atheism had no large following or political power until communism. Apparently it takes repressive laws, abolishment of civil liberties, and much bloodshed to convince a majority to embrace atheism.

I think you twist the facts to argue your side sir.

You're saying that, wars started in the name of atheism (which they technically weren't they were started for political purposes but ok) were far bloodier than all the other religious wars? Are you seriously taking that stand? Or are you talking just in the 20th century?

[alltherage]

I like how this thread goes from Hindus bashing Christians to CPers bashing Christians along with other "religions." CONVERT TO ATHEISM!! IT'S WAY EASIER!!

[Thor]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

The Soviet Union, China, Cambodia all killed millions in the name of politics. They all subscribed to atheistic faith.

Its impressive how you have in a few words completely shown your utter lack of understanding.

Did Communism kill in the name of Atheism? No. Did communism have a fever pitch patriotism and cult of personality, yes.

More importantly, do you honestly think that lack of belief in a god was the reason people assimilated and followed the patriotic fervor of their regime?

You could say, Canada is formed on non belief in bridge trolls, the lack of bridge collapses and the fact we have such a successful society shows exactly how valuable these beliefs are.

Non belief is not a psychological reason to agree to mass murder, not a reason to irrationally destroy a religious race based on omg 'religion'....

People all the time argue Hitler was an Atheist, which with any study shows he would be very unlikely to be. However IF he was, why would he destroy a religious group like the Jews which were hated by christians/catholics/muslims... To the point that Adolph had friends in the Vatican!

But its cute to pretend Atheism, or 'lack of worship in magical being(s)" somehow allows genocide or favors violent destruction of religious groups or people because of 'lack of morals.'

I'm assuming you haven't read many books or have any clue, so I'll help you. Morals are not derived from the bible. Morals are not derived from religion.

Morals are a part of evolution and the changing moral zeitgeist that we all share.

But thank you for bringing for the most easily and laughably destroyed arguments put forth by ignorant religious zealots like yourself. A challenge would be nice next time.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

You mean in the 20th century? They don't even compare. The atheists were by far the bloodiest religious camp.

lol, its too easy. How is non belief a religion? Do you also blame the non fairy believers in the destruction occuring in the 20th century?

I don't think you can measure any other century because atheism had no large following or political power until communism.

Religion has been a very much OBVIOUS control over humanity for thousands of years, it would seem logical that someone would try to use the counter to preach another form of control. All which is completely illogical when you actually think for 2 mins about what is non belief, and how non belief could be used to destroy human life and support incredible harm to humanity.

It couldn't. Just like Economic Darwinists who thought Selfish 'gene' meant greed is good are ######s, its like your argument and many religious who are completely clueless that non belief does not lead to violence and mass extermination of races.

If you simply look at the 'non belief' side, you see we don't agree god is in charge, we don't agree he commands us.

I see this atheism killed more people than religion argument all the time from ignorant people, but wow, you took it to a new level.

Apparently it takes repressive laws, abolishment of civil liberties, and much bloodshed to convince a majority to embrace atheism.

Yeah, lack of support for a celestial dictator would obviously be against freedom from a dictator god, freedom from ideas already claimed to be accurate/true and obviously Religion has no responsibility for all the hatred, division and immense desperation this world deals with daily.

Because your belief says, "im right, you are wrong, my god is the only one the rest are false."

Thats what getting along is all about, right?

[photon]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

The Soviet Union, China, Cambodia all killed millions in the name of politics. They all subscribed to atheistic faith.

Their leaders all had moustaches too! Obviously facial hair is the root cause.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by photon

Their leaders all had moustaches too! Obviously facial hair is the root cause.

Mao didn't have a moustache

And there are no extremist buddhists or confuciusessss.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

The Soviet Union, China, Cambodia all killed millions in the name of politics. They all subscribed to atheistic faith.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,12...ichard-Dawkins

What is your opinion about Stalin and Hitler as Atheists?

I have said in my book that Hitler is not at all atheist, as he was religiously biased against Jewish people. Stalin was following communism dogmatically. I have already said that none of us, in effect derive our morality from religion. Stalin, in fact, used the dogmatic communism as his source of morality - if we call it morality at all. Being atheist does not ask you to become dogmatic or communist, but only ask you not to believe in God. A person working in a Mafia group can also be an atheist although it will be illogical to say that atheism pushed him to the Mafia group. There are other colleagues working with him who are religious.

http://richarddawkins.net/articleCom...wkinsnet,page5

http://breakingspells.wordpress.com/...se-of-atheism/

Never has a causal effect been demonstrated by any historian (much less a theist in a debate) between atheism and the actions of, say, Stalin. Stalin ordered the deaths of thousands because he deemed them a threat to his government –a government that was dogmatic and powerful. Indeed, on could easily argue that Stalin’s position was that he “replaced” God and inserted himself as the national deity with statues and portraits in all public (and many private) lands and buildings. Those that carried out his death warrants did so because they believed in Stalin –because they “worshiped” him.

There are no gulags or concentration camps in recorded history that were designed to fulfill a “lack of belief” in something, which is what atheism is. None were constructed to destroy lives out of reason or rational thought, which is what informs the atheistic conclusion.

Also, atheism is not a "faith":

http://www.atheistrev.com/2008/01/at...ire-faith.html

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Mao didn't have a moustache

And there are no extremist buddhists or confuciusessss.

Your right Mao didn't believe in facial hair, he didn't much believe in bathing either. However deflowing young girls, and killing his own people, that was his religion.

[ok, ok,....I get it]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Religion FTW!

Agreed, it's a crutch for the weak...

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

You mean in the 20th century? They don't even compare. The atheists were by far the bloodiest religious camp. I don't think you can measure any other century because atheism had no large following or political power until communism. Apparently it takes repressive laws, abolishment of civil liberties, and much bloodshed to convince a majority to embrace atheism.

It looks like people have piled all over you for your answers here, so I'll keep this short and sweet.

You cannot group atheists together and argue they, as a 'collective', have caused more wars. You simply cannot do that. Religious wars are religious because they are guided by a 'higher power'. Atheists are not. There...Is...No...Common...Thread.

[cyclone3483]

Originally Posted by alltherage

I like how this thread goes from Hindus bashing Christians to CPers bashing Christians along with other "religions." CONVERT TO ATHEISM!! IT'S WAY EASIER!!

Easier...for now. Wait until the after life...gets a bit tougher then. Weeping...gnashing of teeth...lake of fire...

No thanks, I like having MY eternity secured in a much nicer place.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Thor

Its impressive how you have in a few words completely shown your utter lack of understanding.

Did Communism kill in the name of Atheism? No. Did communism have a fever pitch patriotism and cult of personality, yes.

So you acknowledge that all wars and bloodshed are not caused by religion. Well good. That's a start.

Originally Posted by Thor

More importantly, do you honestly think that lack of belief in a god was the reason people assimilated and followed the patriotic fervor of their regime?

I believe that communists recognized the religions of their country as a challenge to absolute power over the people. That is why they all embraced atheism and pushed it on the people through educational retraining and sever oppression of people of faith.

Originally Posted by Thor

You could say, Canada is formed on non belief in bridge trolls, the lack of bridge collapses and the fact we have such a successful society shows exactly how valuable these beliefs are.

Non belief is not a psychological reason to agree to mass murder, not a reason to irrationally destroy a religious race based on omg 'religion'....

Canada was formed under Christian principles. There was free expression of religion in all aspects of private and public life. Fortunately its religion wasn't hijacked by some power hungry dictator and morphed into an excuse for bloody conquest.

Originally Posted by Thor

People all the time argue Hitler was an Atheist, which with any study shows he would be very unlikely to be. However IF he was, why would he destroy a religious group like the Jews which were hated by christians/catholics/muslims... To the point that Adolph had friends in the Vatican!

The idea that a blond hair blued eye white man is the superior race and by nature would rise to the top is not an opinion Hitler came to all by himself. Darwin introduced the question by writing the book titled "The origin of species and race". His theory was that animals as well as humans evolved from lower forms. Hitler seen blacks as well as Poles and Jews as inferior races who were holding back human's natural progression. He treated these groups as less than human because he seen them as below his race on the evolutionary scale. His involvement with the Catholic church was a political move on both sides. Hitler made nice nice because he wanted the Italians fighting for him and the Catholic church wanted the retention of the power they still had and a place in the new world order. Knowing Hitler's beliefs the Italians would have seen the ovens shortly after Hitler was through using them.

Originally Posted by Thor

But its cute to pretend Atheism, or 'lack of worship in magical being(s)" somehow allows genocide or favors violent destruction of religious groups or people because of 'lack of morals.'

I'm only observing the track record of atheistic nations. You don't seem to have a problem at looking at the track records of Christian nations with venom. The Soviet Union, China, and Cambodia all possessed strong moral principles that they were both willing to kill and die for. As a Christian I reject their morality. It isn't compatible with my beliefs. Hitler acted on his beliefs as well. The parts of the Catholic church which made political allegiance with Hitler were compromising their own morality for political gain. Other Catholics risked their lives to be true to their moral sensibilities.

I don't think much of your moral position on abortion. You believe that a human child is less than human if he or she happens to be located within their mothers body. That belief has led to more bloodshed than all the wars of the twentieth century combined. Still I acknowledge it is your moral belief even if the results are detestable.

Originally Posted by Thor

I'm assuming you haven't read many books or have any clue, so I'll help you. Morals are not derived from the bible. Morals are not derived from religion.

Morals are derived by our own world view of things which includes perceptions we receive through the religious books I read and the garbage you read. Collective morality is derived by collective experience and dialogue. That is why Atheists are always trying to silence Christian public expression.

Originally Posted by Thor

Morals are a part of evolution and the changing moral zeitgeist that we all share.

We don't share much in regards to morality. My hope is when the evolution doesn't come like you anticipate that atheist's don't try to help it along like Hitler and those communist nations did.

Originally Posted by Thor

But thank you for bringing for the most easily and laughably destroyed arguments put forth by ignorant religious zealots like yourself. A challenge would be nice next time.

If you want a challenge try rising above your deep seated hatred and overwhelming pride.

[ok, ok,....I get it]

Originally Posted by cyclone3483

Easier...for now. Wait until the after life...gets a bit tougher then. Weeping...gnashing of teeth...lake of fire...

No thanks, I like having MY eternity secured in a much nicer place.

ha ha

[cyclone3483]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

It looks like people have piled all over you for your answers here, so I'll keep this short and sweet.

You cannot group atheists together and argue they, as a 'collective', have caused more wars. You simply cannot do that. Religious wars are religious because they are guided by a 'higher power'. Atheists are not. There...Is...No...Common...Thread.

If by 'higher power' you mean misguided human, then you are correct. Religion is often used as a crutch to create unrest, people use it for political gain. Some Muslim extremists use religious fanaticism to get their downtrodden people focused on 'evil Western influences' rather than the fact that their leadership kill them by the thousands and keep them oppressed.

And as a Christian, I have to show Christians in this same light as there have been Jim Jones, David Koresh, the Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades and Salem Witch Hunt in past. God did not tell Jones and Koresh what to do no more did He give guidance to puritans to kill suspected witches or Church leaders to 'convert' muslims through warfare.

It usually (not always) comes down to either a crazy meglo-maniac in charge or selfish political leadership...not religious affiliation. (note: 'usually, not always')